Market Rental Review

I was intending this thread to be a good reference point for the forum on how a standard rental market review on a CIP is conducted.

Please keep going Dazz! Some of us are genuinely interested and are looking for a way into this pond that avoids those creatures with big teeth...

Every little bit helps because there is precious little decent guidance out there. In any case, I am finding every deal is a unique and individual proposition, such that generic statements about "CIP" are next to useless anyway. Every lease, every tenant, every property is different and presents completely different risks. Real life examples are the only way to learn IMO so please keep 'em coming...

By the way, the yields I am seeing right now don't make a lot of sense (in general) given the risk but I am just trying to be in a position to make a move as and when opportunities arise. Most vendors are holding out still on cap rates but I reckon with a bit of patience... here's hoping anyway! ;)
 
I was intending this thread to be a good reference point for the forum on how a standard rental market review on a CIP is conducted.
Thanks, Dazz, for sharing your experience.

TheAnalyst: both parties to a commercial lease agreement are (usually ;)) profit-making entities. Isn't a tenant who wants to pay below-market rent, in order to have higher profits, greedier than a landlord seeking a fair return on their investment? :confused: We're not talking about a monopoly, or misuse of one party's power; we're simply talking about the actions of the market.
 
Folks,

PLEASE keep this thread on topic otherwise it will be closed and once again, a valuable discussion that can potentially benefit us all will be gone.
 
Well there has been an eerie silence for the past 10 days, no movement from either party....until yesterday.


The last volley in our tussle was a cracking cross court overhead smash, delivered with real gusto and venom from our solicitor, deep into the corner just within their sideline.


Nothing has been returned over the net thus far, but we cannot presume that the shot was a clear winner.....sometimes they take the pace off the ball with a sly backspin overhead lob, we are still waiting.


The much larger rental invoice for February, which itemised and included the new market rates was issued on Jan 20th, and due for payment no later than the 1st of Feb.


Obviously with that falling on a Sunday, they must make the funds available prior to that. None of this "we'll pay it Monday nonsense". They left it to the very last minute, with the entry going in late yesterday afternoon.


Unfortunately they have played silly buggers with us, and made the payment figure some oddball number that bears no resemblance to anything we invoiced them. It was less than normal, and equivalent to the lowly market rates attainable more than 2 years ago. They must think they are playing with a bunny.


I tried to back calculate where they pulled that strange number. It was broken down into 4 components. The nett rental for the office space, the nett rental for the carbays, GST on both them, and an electricity bill issued from the strata company.


Whichever way I worked it, the number paid was even less than what they would have owed us if we had no review at all. That is, they've taken it upon themsleves to simply ignore our lawyers letter, ignore our invoice, and just start making it up as they go along. Situation normal for a Tenant when they disagree in my experience.


Fortunately, the Lease wording is all our way, and we have the right to charge the invoiced amount even though they have not agreed or assented to the review. They are forced to pay it. "Until the final Rent from the Market Rent Review date is determined, the Tenant shall pay to the Landlord the Proposed Rent sent to the Tenant in the Notice." Lovely. Bit like what the SRO does to investors when they hand you a high land tax bill. You can argue all you want, but you must still pay it.


So - what's our recourse, cos they are attempting to play silly buggers with us ?? Always gotta have a big sledgehammer. That's why we left houses. Landlord doesn't have a sledgehammer.


Well, first off, on Monday morning we are going to extract the differential between what they were invoiced and what they paid, directly from their bank guarantee. There is over 200K of their money sitting in our account (has been for the past 18 months earning us interest), available to be ripped out of that special account and straight into our normal account. No Tenant's signature or Govt dept involved. It's a proper bond, which actually gives surety to the Landlord, without having to beg the Tenant to consent.


Secondly, a further letter from our solicitor shall be sent to them notifying them of the following ;

1. The Bond has been ripped into for the unpaid amount.
2. The Bond must be replenished immediately back to the original level.
3. They are in breach of an essential part of the Lease.
4. A separate invoice for our solicitor's costs (which if remains unpaid will also be taken out of their bond).
5. Penalty interest on the unpaid amount shall be applied at horrendous %ages, as agreed in the Lease.


I would be over the moon if they crack the ****s and move out. It will mean that I will continue to receive rents for the next 10 years (increasing rents every year) for an empty box, without any wear and tear. The State Justice Dept is itching to move in, so I may be able to wangle a higher rent still off the WA Govt. Nice to see a bit of taxpayer money flowing in the right direction. :)


I cannot conceivably see a conglomeration of 20 separate superannuation funds, all based in the Eastern States, going bankrupt, so they probably won't....but we can always hope.


I'm almost positive that I'm safe cashflow-wise and the Tenant won't fall over. If they do, there will be a few million people up and down Vic / NSW / Qld who shall be hurting alot more than I, and the Fed Govt would likely step in to help them pay my rent bill.


Anyway, that's where I am at currently. Never a dull day being a Landlord.


Now, I'm off to play pool chasey with the kids.
 
Unfortunately they have played silly buggers with us, and made the payment figure some oddball number that bears no resemblance to anything we invoiced them. It was less than normal, and equivalent to the lowly market rates attainable more than 2 years ago. They must think they are playing with a bunny.

What a load of cr@p! Take em to the cleaners Daz, that's just a pathetic effort on their behalf. They're assuming because they're a big conglomerate they can do what they like until it's sorted out. And to just pluck a random figure instead of at least the same figure as the last period is just moronic - proves they're just d!ck!ing with you!

When my commercial lease figures increase (every year), I consider it my responsibility to ensure I pay the correct amount. The LL's agent usually sends out the standard invoice for the old $ amount which I proceed to ignore and pay the correct increased amount (for which they've thanked me later on - guess it makes them look like they know what they're doing when the cash hits the LL's account).

Go get em Daz! ;)

PS loving the story as it unravels, very interesting.
 
Oh, Dazz, you'd think they'd have figured out by now that they're not playing with a pushover. :rolleyes: I'm getting a great deal of vicarious joy, imagining their solicitors trying to "fix" this, only to discover that you've got a watertight lease and that they can't in fact fix it. All the time just costing your tenant more in legals and penalty interest etc.
 
Thanks Dazz for posting the story as it unfolds!

I love reading novels, following the subplots, twist and turns, but this story is great to read in actual time :) Also love the tennis analogy, I think their "sly backspin overhead lob" was met with cracking passing shot from team Dazz.

I am very interested to see their response to your letter on Monday. I can't fathom the logic behind their amount paid on Friday. You would assume that they are receiving advice, and they understand the increase to the new market rate AND that the difference will be extracted from their bank guarantee. I can only think that they will be arguing on the definition / actuality of "market rate".

As per steveadl's comments, we review the new ratchet amounts and reconcile with the contracts on our leases very diligently. Yep, we are on the other side of the court at this point, but keen to get to the shady end soon.

Enjoy the next round, as I will when reading about it.

Cheers,
Horizon
 
Dazz

Just love the finesse with which you CIP guys operate - sledgehammers and solicitors waiting to be let off the leash! :D 'Tis a pity resi tenants are such a protected species. :rolleyes:

Seriously, am enjoying the saga as it unfolds. Hope all goes well and that your retirement plans are on track!

And shortly, when you've got a little time on your hands, there'll be no excuses for not getting busy on that book you've been thinking about for a while!! :p

Cheers
LynnH
 
.


I would be over the moon if they crack the ****s and move out. It will mean that I will continue to receive rents for the next 10 years (increasing rents every year) for an empty box, without any wear and tear. .

Hope it works out for your Dazz, just remember, once people start hiring lawyers, no-body wins except the lawyers.
 
Hope it works out for your Dazz, just remember, once people start hiring lawyers, no-body wins except the lawyers.

But it would appear that the tenant is paying Dazz's solicitor's fees too?! :

TKPFAD said:
4. A separate invoice for our solicitor's costs (which if remains unpaid will also be taken out of their bond).
 
...There is over 200K of their money sitting in our account (has been for the past 18 months earning us interest)...

Really enjoying this post.

WA laws must be different Victoria's, because it is my understanding that in Vic, the interest earned goes to the tenant.
 
Wow what a great read.

The way I see it, 2 business entities wen into business with each other, both fully knowing what they were entering, and both being "big enough" to be under no illusions about what they were entering.

Therefore, if by chance market increase happens to be a big increase at this time, it should not have been a total surprise to either party.

To Dazz in this case, a pleasant outcome, for the tenant, not as sweet - but noone can seriously say the tenat had no idea of this, they invst money in property amongst other thigns, they don't know the state of the market ?

Interesting to read how big companies still play the same tactics of what are considered smaller and not so professional... What else can you call their behaviour ? they are whinging about a lease they signed, before Dazz was even around ... and they know the lease conditions if they don't pay up & wnat to move - keep paying Daz rent for 10 years....so how can this be anything other than them trying to not pay the rent amount they are due to (and agreed, let's not forget) to pay..

Certainly a very interesting read from this side of the screen to see what unfolds and how it goes
 
WA laws must be different Victoria's, because it is my understanding that in Vic, the interest earned goes to the tenant.
Apart from some states having laws to protect retail tenants, my understanding was that commercial leases were minimally regulated, and could contain whatever the two parties agreed upon. Can anybody confirm/deny?
 
I think that's right Tracey.

Daz - at this point they just sound incompetent more than anything else. Highly amusing, keep it coming.
 
Unfortunately, perception is reality at the moment. All commercial and industrial property is being tarred by the same brush. This is because the banks have tightened credit in this area and in some cases (foreign players) are selling off their commercial loan books. Due to the lack of the liquidity properties of even prime assets in this area have dropped. I know a couple of guys working for the major banks and their biggest worry is the Commercial Property Lending.:eek:

So what are the consequences....nothing so long as you have a tenant or looking to increase your porfolio by borrowing more.

Having said that there are some smaller cashed up Ethnic businessmen picking some of these places for next to nothing. They will be the ones on the BRW 200...next cycle.:D

Steve, the market has changed....if people don't adjust then the market will change them.


Like all investments Sash, some will flounder and some will prosper. Well positioned commercial property will continue to perform well and experience very low vacancy rates. For example in the Norwood retail precinct where I work, the values (and rents) are going nowhere but up - regardless of the current economic hysteria.

Dazz has some great commercial property, so don't lump him in with "we'll see what happens to the WA commerical market." Remember, he's only one guy with a few commerical properties that could prove to excel over the next year, and after all that's what this site is about - individual investors and their properties - Dazz doesn't own the entire Perth commercial market....... yet! ;) If I had the resources, I would buy retail premises in my business area in a heartbeat - but I wouldn't necessarily be buying vacant industrial land at Aldinga. I couldn't care less what the "SA commercial market" would do for the next couple years, I know there's only one direction for that Norwood property.
 
Well said......also hope Dazz is dealing with guys who go by the law....otherwise a couple of Rebel bikers maybe paying him a visit...LOL! He maybe needing a knee replacement or two. :p

No contract is watertight.........will be interesting to see what happens. These sort of things could be drawn through the courts for years....and you better have deep pockets.

I work for a professional services firm ....and some of this suff has been drawn thorugh the courts for years.....

Hope it works out for your Dazz, just remember, once people start hiring lawyers, no-body wins except the lawyers.
 
What happens if they put the company paying the rents into liquidation, move their staff and assets to a new entity?

Have you a clause for that?.....


Interesting to read how big companies still play the same tactics of what are considered smaller and not so professional... What else can you call their behaviour ? they are whinging about a lease they signed, before Dazz was even around ... and they know the lease conditions if they don't pay up & wnat to move - keep paying Daz rent for 10 years....so how can this be anything other than them trying to not pay the rent amount they are due to (and agreed, let's not forget) to pay..

Certainly a very interesting read from this side of the screen to see what unfolds and how it goes
 
With RIP subject to finance clauses, you can put in the contract ''subject to finance approval in 14 days'' or ''by this date''.

But...you actually get 2 further days after this 14 day point/date to notify the vendor of the outcome of the finance application, even if this is not specifically written in the contract.
This just doesn't sound right; it seems contrary to the "time is of the essence" clauses that are in most real estate contracts.

Are you able to provide a reference? Which element of statutory or common law is this relying on?
 
Back
Top